Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[Vin]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Avant-garde as it likes to think itself, Vancouver remains a very Presbyterian town at heart. That's great from a work ethic and scholarly POV, but totally functional and unimaginative in look.

I dont think being Presbyterian, Catholic, Islamic, Jewish, Buddhist or of other religious beliefs have anything to do with why this place is so bland. Instead. I would probably think the hippy and drug culture of the 60s are more likely causes for where this city is at now. Drugs and too much booze hurt critical thinking. That's why the problems of East Hastings cannot be solved by administrators with limited imagination, courage and will power, while the economy has to be kept afloat by foreign investment money. Back when this city was truly 'presbyterian', great things were built, including the tallest building in the Commonwealth, Lions Gate Bridge, and many other avant Garde and innovative buildings. Even the planning of the viaducts predated the hippy 60s and 70s.

[Klazu]

Also Seattle is planning on building a new "super road" to replace the Alaska Viaduct on ground level. And as one can guess, people are up in arms pro and against the plan.

Seattle Times: ‘8-lane highway’ on Seattle’s waterfront? Critics challenge post-viaduct plan

[Vin]

Another stupid decision.

[Alex Mackinnon]

At least the tunnel is rolling along nicely now. It's been managing about 700' per month, and the boring is 61% done now.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by Vin

Another stupid decision.

In what sense? They are actually adding more capacity with the new road (3+3 lanes) and the tunnel (2+2 lanes) and the viaduct there is really an eyesore. Ours is beautiful compared to this:

[red-paladin]

Seattle's waterfront there is one of the ugliest places I've ever been to.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by red-paladin

Seattle's waterfront there is one of the ugliest places I've ever been to.

Yeah I'm surprised that double deck roadway hasn't collapsed in an earthquake. Though it does look like it has been reinforced.

[twoNeurons]

That's fine if they're replacing the viaduct with a tunnel... but they're not. They're replacing the viaduct with a road that's WIDER.

You may think it's "ugly" but it's also potentially a much more pedestrian friendly environment. The tunnel is an opportunity to REDUCE the number of lanes, not increase them. It's only by doing that would the streetscape become better.



I suspect that this would never have been built, though, if it didn't have an increase in vehicle capacity.

Besides, is our downtown view any better?

[Vin]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

That's fine if they're replacing the viaduct with a tunnel... but they're not. They're replacing the viaduct with a road that's WIDER.

You may think it's "ugly" but it's also potentially a much more pedestrian friendly environment. The tunnel is an opportunity to REDUCE the number of lanes, not increase them. It's only by doing that would the streetscape become better.

Exactly, twoNeurons. Just like our future WIDER Pacific Boulevard with increased traffic usage. How dumb is that?

I find the double-decker roadway quite appealing actually, especially with the creeper/ivy plant climbing up the columns. It's the kind of urban heritage that makes North American cities unique and attractive in its own way. The only thing ugly in the neighbouhorhood is the dock-land area. If they are spruced up as waterfront parklands, cafes, shops, etc, the viaducts there wouldn't even seem half as bad. Context, people, context.

[twoNeurons]

Or how about creatively using the space UNDER the viaducts as a shelter from Raincouver's lovely liquid sunshine. What's with this city's fascination with making people traipse through wet puddles?

[Aroundtheworld]

Seattle's debacle for me is more proof that Vancouver is making the right decision. We are replacing a vestigial eyesore with a boulevard and it's going to cost a few $100 M. They are replacing it with a tunnel and it's going to cost over $4 BILLION (4x more than the original estimate).

I shake my head at Seattle's transportation decisions. So much stupidity.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Or how about creatively using the space UNDER the viaducts as a shelter from Raincouver's lovely liquid sunshine. What's with this city's fascination with making people traipse through wet puddles?

Have you been under the viaducts? Since the E and W lanes are separated, each one is only 2-3 lanes wide, and there's not really much dry ground under them when it's raining.

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

Seattle's debacle for me is more proof that Vancouver is making the right decision. We are replacing a vestigial eyesore with a boulevard and it's going to cost a few $100 M. They are replacing it with a tunnel and it's going to cost over $4 BILLION (4x more than the original estimate).

I shake my head at Seattle's transportation decisions. So much stupidity.

The current city government in Vancouver "wants" to take them down and replace them with nothing. The "boulevard" or supper road or what ever catch phrase is deemed fitting is just a re-alignment of existing surface roads.

In our case they "want" to remove transportation infrastructure and replace it with nothing. The result is that mobility would be reduced, nothing else.

There is a reason Seattle will continue to be a thriving global economic hub, and Vancouver will not.

[Migrant_Coconut]

The problem isn't really the boulevard - it's the traffic lights they're going to stick in-between. Really not sure how Vision arrived at "marginal travel time increases of 1-3 minutes."

[s211]

Originally Posted by cornholio

There is a reason Seattle will continue to be a thriving global economic hub, and Vancouver will not.

Nailed it.

Vancouver: closed for business (unless you're trying to develop software to cool the earth with elf tears, in which case you have our man-crush).

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Have you been under the viaducts? Since the E and W lanes are separated, each one is only 2-3 lanes wide, and there's not really much dry ground under them when it's raining.

Fortunately, most sidewalks are less than 1 lane wide. Even the "super-wide" ones. You have to use your imagination.... something which it seems this city's government has a problem doing.

Take a look at this area: https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.27762...2!8i6656?hl=en

The space in between the viaducts could be used for an outdoor-indoor market, covering the area in between the viaducts with stores and shops while lining the bottom of the viaducts with fancy lighting effects.

Or how about... **gasp** taking the bikes OFF the viaduct and putting them UNDER them. I'm sure riders would appreciate the cover.



I can tell you that as someone who rides the Central Valley Greenway, I GREATLY appreciate riding under the Millennium line ( quite a bit narrower than the viaducts, don't you think ). Sure, you'd have to arrange access from property owners nearing BC Place, but isn't that a WIN-WIN?

No matter how you slice it... removing the viaducts are a PURE vanity project and all about $$$. If it was a smart move, they'd already be tearing them down and have unanimous approval across the board.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by cornholio

The current city government in Vancouver "wants" to take them down and replace them with nothing. The "boulevard" or supper road or what ever catch phrase is deemed fitting is just a re-alignment of existing surface roads.

In our case they "want" to remove transportation infrastructure and replace it with nothing. The result is that mobility would be reduced, nothing else.

There is a reason Seattle will continue to be a thriving global economic hub, and Vancouver will not.

Well, give them credit, they are replacing them with a horrendously graded Georgia Street which will make life hell for those living within earshot. There is also some weird cycling ramp that will be far less convenient for cyclists than the viaducts. But dammit, they'll be striking a blow against the evil car and that's all that matters!

[Vin]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Well, give them credit, they are replacing them with a horrendously graded Georgia Street which will make life hell for those living within earshot. There is also some weird cycling ramp that will be far less convenient for cyclists than the viaducts. But dammit, they'll be striking a blow against the evil car and that's all that matters!

Yup, at the same time striking a blow against goods transportation trucks, mail delivery vans, public buses, taxis, electric cars, co-op cars etc. In fact, many delivery companies don't even do downtown anymore. At the same time, all the stalled vehicles are contributing more fragrant gas emissions to the city. Cyclists can huff and puff while negotiating that ramp. Good luck to them.

[red-paladin]

Originally Posted by Vin

In fact, many delivery companies don't even do downtown anymore.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by cornholio

There is a reason Seattle will continue to be a thriving global economic hub, and Vancouver will not.

Because one is in the US and the other is in Canada?